Date   

Re: edgex-taf file structure for review

Cloud Tsai
 

Hi Ramya,

Thanks for the suggestion.
You are right.  We leverage the work made by Vishwas.  Also, we will adopt the "UC_" naming convention for the sub folders.

Hi Vishwas,

May I have your help resubmit the PR?  We could rename the repository when we move out from holding.
THanks.

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 at 01:54, Ranganathan, Ramya <ramya.ranganathan@...> wrote:

>> Remove Jenkinsfile and create the ones according to Lisa's proposal in another repository

When the TAF demo code was initially pushed to the holding repo, this taf-pipeline implementation also was pushed by Vishwas alongside with a PR in the Holding repo named “regression test” (btw, I do think the naming could have been better). Since it was not pursued at that time , the PR was cancelled. Now that this topic has risen , do you think we can reissue the PR so the WG can provide feedback?

 

>> I notice that the naming convention of some folders are not consistent and the "ing" is not necessary, so we will rename:

    • Functional_Testing -> functionalTest
    • Integration_Testing -> integrationTest
    • Performance_Testing -> performanceTest

I second Lenny’s comments here to use “UC_” naming convention for each Use case sub folders under each category “functional/integration/performance”

For eg:  Device to Cloud; Data Driven Commanding etc

 

Thanks,

Ramya

 

From: Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 7:00 AM
To: Rashidi-ranjbar, Lisa A <lisa.a.rashidi-ranjbar@...>
Cc: Ranganathan, Ramya <ramya.ranganathan@...>; Goodell, Leonard <leonard.goodell@...>; Jim White <jim@...>; edgex-tsc-qa-test@...; Ojeda, Ernesto <ernesto.ojeda@...>; Gregg, James R <james.r.gregg@...>; Reyes, Emilio <emilio.reyes@...>
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi all,

 

Thanks for all your feedback.

As Ramya mentioned, the folders of "Integration_Testing" and "Performance_Testing" will evolve once we start developing them.

Also, according to the WG meeting yesterday, we will make the following changes:

  1. Rename testCaseApps to testModules.
  2. Remove Jenkinsfile and create the ones according to Lisa's proposal in another repository
  3. I notice that the naming convention of some folders are not consistent and the "ing" is not necessary, so we will rename:
    • Functional_Testing -> functionalTest
    • Integration_Testing -> integrationTest
    • Performance_Testing -> performanceTest

We will send out another structure diagram later this week.

 

On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 05:14, Rashidi-ranjbar, Lisa A <lisa.a.rashidi-ranjbar@...> wrote:

Hi All,

 

I’m seeing a pretty big issue with the setup of this repository with regards to the CI infrastructure.

With the changes DevOps has made in Geneva it is important to note that any Jenkinsfile put in the root of the repository will automatically create a Jenkins job associated with it.

These changes are still underway but you can see the progress looking at the EdgeXFoundry organization in Jenkins:

https://jenkins.edgexfoundry.org/view/EdgeX%20Foundry%20Project/job/edgexfoundry/

 

In this diagram we have only one Jenkinsfile. This means that there will be one job running all these test suites associated with the following:

  • Functional Testing
  • Integration Testing
  • Performance Testing

 

From my perspective I think we will need more of a fine tuning available for running these tests. I don’t think having one Jenkins job and one Jenkinsfile will be sufficient.

Even today we only have more than one Jenkins job to run the suite in blackbox tests. The fact that we run ALL of the blackbox test suite at once has been a major pain point for using blackbox testing.

If we lump all of these tests together for TAF we will be creating an even larger overall suite of tests than the existing blackbox testing. Which in time we will mean people will be waiting even longer to get the test suite that they care about completed.

 

Instead of lumping things together we need to think about how we can split things up. Using the plugins we have set up for Geneva we can split things up using two different ways:

 

For common elements, we can look at using things like git submodules and/or prebuilt docker images to pull in those.

Any tests we can move the source code repository are beneficial. This would mean you can run them on every check in getting a shorter feedback loop back to the developers.

 

These are some thoughts I need to understand the requirements we have for running the test suites to try to get a better architecture for the CI infrastructure here.

 

Lisa

 

From: <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> on behalf of "Ranganathan, Ramya" <ramya.ranganathan@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 11:22 AM
To: "Goodell, Leonard" <leonard.goodell@...>, Jim White <jim@...>, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: "edgex-tsc-qa-test@..." <edgex-tsc-qa-test@...>, "Ranganathan, Ramya" <ramya.ranganathan@...>
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Lenny/Jim,

 

Testcase apps is just a collection of modular functions that exercises a test condition and checks for the test result.

I agree with your reasoning that lower level functions can be put directly under test case app.

The reason we have “keyword folder” is just because it is a robot terminology and the logical place for the robot keywords is the testcase app folder.

If there are functions written in python, it will be put directly under testcase app. I will let the TAF evolve on this.

 

Test Scenarios are broader use case scenarios that makes calls to the test case apps and promotes higher level decision making and extends the capability to run these test case apps under different scenarios. I agree with Lenny’s comments below :

>>    I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

For Jim’s comment , I see Test scenarios -> Integration testing and performance testing will evolve and include more than the single service testing to cover cross service E2E test scenarios. I will let TAF evolve on this as well.

 

Thanks,

Ramya

 

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Goodell, Leonard
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 9:37 AM
To: Jim White <jim@...>; Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Cloud,

   Building on Jim’s questions..

Aren’t testCaseApp just a type of testScencarios? i.e. api_testing.

Also, why do we need the keywords level folder? Can the lower folders be moved up to testCaseApp?

 

Jim,

   I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

-Lenny

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 8:05 AM
To: Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Cloud, thanks for putting up this strawman. 

 

Is the testCaseApp folder, with service subfolders, essentially service API tests?  If that is the case, might the functional testing the API tests?

 

Do testScencarios refer to testCaseApps or vice versa or are they totally unrelated?  What's the dotted line around testScenarios?

 

Integration tests has no subfolder, but I can envision particular integration tests already (core to appl service, device service to core, etc.).  Do we need to think about service to service integration and whole system integration (from device service through application service for example) and how we organize these

 

On performance testing, I think we would want service level tests, but there are other key performance measures that are even more important in the long run.  Examples: time for single sensor reading from south to north, max data throughput of core data, etc.  Do we need to consider performance testing beyond simple metrics and how we organize those tests?

 

 

Jim White

CTO, IOTech

EdgeX Foundry co-founder & TSC Vice-chairman

On EdgeX Slack @ jpwhite

612-916-6693

 

 

On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 07:54, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...> wrote:

Hi all,

 

As the discussion, we will make all kinds of the new tests in edgex-taf repository, including functional test, integration test, performance test, and so on.

The attachment is the proposal of new file structure.  Please help take a look and let us know your thoughts.

Thanks.

 

--

Best Regards,

Cloud Tsai


 

--

Best Regards,

Cloud Tsai



--
Best Regards,
Cloud Tsai


Re: edgex-taf file structure for review

Ranganathan, Ramya
 

>> Remove Jenkinsfile and create the ones according to Lisa's proposal in another repository

When the TAF demo code was initially pushed to the holding repo, this taf-pipeline implementation also was pushed by Vishwas alongside with a PR in the Holding repo named “regression test” (btw, I do think the naming could have been better). Since it was not pursued at that time , the PR was cancelled. Now that this topic has risen , do you think we can reissue the PR so the WG can provide feedback?

 

>> I notice that the naming convention of some folders are not consistent and the "ing" is not necessary, so we will rename:

    • Functional_Testing -> functionalTest
    • Integration_Testing -> integrationTest
    • Performance_Testing -> performanceTest

I second Lenny’s comments here to use “UC_” naming convention for each Use case sub folders under each category “functional/integration/performance”

For eg:  Device to Cloud; Data Driven Commanding etc

 

Thanks,

Ramya

 

From: Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2020 7:00 AM
To: Rashidi-ranjbar, Lisa A <lisa.a.rashidi-ranjbar@...>
Cc: Ranganathan, Ramya <ramya.ranganathan@...>; Goodell, Leonard <leonard.goodell@...>; Jim White <jim@...>; edgex-tsc-qa-test@...; Ojeda, Ernesto <ernesto.ojeda@...>; Gregg, James R <james.r.gregg@...>; Reyes, Emilio <emilio.reyes@...>
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi all,

 

Thanks for all your feedback.

As Ramya mentioned, the folders of "Integration_Testing" and "Performance_Testing" will evolve once we start developing them.

Also, according to the WG meeting yesterday, we will make the following changes:

  1. Rename testCaseApps to testModules.
  2. Remove Jenkinsfile and create the ones according to Lisa's proposal in another repository
  3. I notice that the naming convention of some folders are not consistent and the "ing" is not necessary, so we will rename:
    • Functional_Testing -> functionalTest
    • Integration_Testing -> integrationTest
    • Performance_Testing -> performanceTest

We will send out another structure diagram later this week.

 

On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 05:14, Rashidi-ranjbar, Lisa A <lisa.a.rashidi-ranjbar@...> wrote:

Hi All,

 

I’m seeing a pretty big issue with the setup of this repository with regards to the CI infrastructure.

With the changes DevOps has made in Geneva it is important to note that any Jenkinsfile put in the root of the repository will automatically create a Jenkins job associated with it.

These changes are still underway but you can see the progress looking at the EdgeXFoundry organization in Jenkins:

https://jenkins.edgexfoundry.org/view/EdgeX%20Foundry%20Project/job/edgexfoundry/

 

In this diagram we have only one Jenkinsfile. This means that there will be one job running all these test suites associated with the following:

  • Functional Testing
  • Integration Testing
  • Performance Testing

 

From my perspective I think we will need more of a fine tuning available for running these tests. I don’t think having one Jenkins job and one Jenkinsfile will be sufficient.

Even today we only have more than one Jenkins job to run the suite in blackbox tests. The fact that we run ALL of the blackbox test suite at once has been a major pain point for using blackbox testing.

If we lump all of these tests together for TAF we will be creating an even larger overall suite of tests than the existing blackbox testing. Which in time we will mean people will be waiting even longer to get the test suite that they care about completed.

 

Instead of lumping things together we need to think about how we can split things up. Using the plugins we have set up for Geneva we can split things up using two different ways:

 

For common elements, we can look at using things like git submodules and/or prebuilt docker images to pull in those.

Any tests we can move the source code repository are beneficial. This would mean you can run them on every check in getting a shorter feedback loop back to the developers.

 

These are some thoughts I need to understand the requirements we have for running the test suites to try to get a better architecture for the CI infrastructure here.

 

Lisa

 

From: <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> on behalf of "Ranganathan, Ramya" <ramya.ranganathan@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 11:22 AM
To: "Goodell, Leonard" <leonard.goodell@...>, Jim White <jim@...>, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: "edgex-tsc-qa-test@..." <edgex-tsc-qa-test@...>, "Ranganathan, Ramya" <ramya.ranganathan@...>
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Lenny/Jim,

 

Testcase apps is just a collection of modular functions that exercises a test condition and checks for the test result.

I agree with your reasoning that lower level functions can be put directly under test case app.

The reason we have “keyword folder” is just because it is a robot terminology and the logical place for the robot keywords is the testcase app folder.

If there are functions written in python, it will be put directly under testcase app. I will let the TAF evolve on this.

 

Test Scenarios are broader use case scenarios that makes calls to the test case apps and promotes higher level decision making and extends the capability to run these test case apps under different scenarios. I agree with Lenny’s comments below :

>>    I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

For Jim’s comment , I see Test scenarios -> Integration testing and performance testing will evolve and include more than the single service testing to cover cross service E2E test scenarios. I will let TAF evolve on this as well.

 

Thanks,

Ramya

 

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Goodell, Leonard
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 9:37 AM
To: Jim White <jim@...>; Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Cloud,

   Building on Jim’s questions..

Aren’t testCaseApp just a type of testScencarios? i.e. api_testing.

Also, why do we need the keywords level folder? Can the lower folders be moved up to testCaseApp?

 

Jim,

   I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

-Lenny

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 8:05 AM
To: Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Cloud, thanks for putting up this strawman. 

 

Is the testCaseApp folder, with service subfolders, essentially service API tests?  If that is the case, might the functional testing the API tests?

 

Do testScencarios refer to testCaseApps or vice versa or are they totally unrelated?  What's the dotted line around testScenarios?

 

Integration tests has no subfolder, but I can envision particular integration tests already (core to appl service, device service to core, etc.).  Do we need to think about service to service integration and whole system integration (from device service through application service for example) and how we organize these

 

On performance testing, I think we would want service level tests, but there are other key performance measures that are even more important in the long run.  Examples: time for single sensor reading from south to north, max data throughput of core data, etc.  Do we need to consider performance testing beyond simple metrics and how we organize those tests?

 

 

Jim White

CTO, IOTech

EdgeX Foundry co-founder & TSC Vice-chairman

On EdgeX Slack @ jpwhite

612-916-6693

 

 

On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 07:54, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...> wrote:

Hi all,

 

As the discussion, we will make all kinds of the new tests in edgex-taf repository, including functional test, integration test, performance test, and so on.

The attachment is the proposal of new file structure.  Please help take a look and let us know your thoughts.

Thanks.

 

--

Best Regards,

Cloud Tsai


 

--

Best Regards,

Cloud Tsai


Re: edgex-taf file structure for review

Cloud Tsai
 

Hi all,

Thanks for all your feedback.
As Ramya mentioned, the folders of "Integration_Testing" and "Performance_Testing" will evolve once we start developing them.
Also, according to the WG meeting yesterday, we will make the following changes:
  1. Rename testCaseApps to testModules.
  2. Remove Jenkinsfile and create the ones according to Lisa's proposal in another repository
  3. I notice that the naming convention of some folders are not consistent and the "ing" is not necessary, so we will rename:
    • Functional_Testing -> functionalTest
    • Integration_Testing -> integrationTest
    • Performance_Testing -> performanceTest
We will send out another structure diagram later this week.

On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 05:14, Rashidi-ranjbar, Lisa A <lisa.a.rashidi-ranjbar@...> wrote:

Hi All,

 

I’m seeing a pretty big issue with the setup of this repository with regards to the CI infrastructure.

With the changes DevOps has made in Geneva it is important to note that any Jenkinsfile put in the root of the repository will automatically create a Jenkins job associated with it.

These changes are still underway but you can see the progress looking at the EdgeXFoundry organization in Jenkins:

https://jenkins.edgexfoundry.org/view/EdgeX%20Foundry%20Project/job/edgexfoundry/

 

In this diagram we have only one Jenkinsfile. This means that there will be one job running all these test suites associated with the following:

  • Functional Testing
  • Integration Testing
  • Performance Testing

 

From my perspective I think we will need more of a fine tuning available for running these tests. I don’t think having one Jenkins job and one Jenkinsfile will be sufficient.

Even today we only have more than one Jenkins job to run the suite in blackbox tests. The fact that we run ALL of the blackbox test suite at once has been a major pain point for using blackbox testing.

If we lump all of these tests together for TAF we will be creating an even larger overall suite of tests than the existing blackbox testing. Which in time we will mean people will be waiting even longer to get the test suite that they care about completed.

 

Instead of lumping things together we need to think about how we can split things up. Using the plugins we have set up for Geneva we can split things up using two different ways:

 

For common elements, we can look at using things like git submodules and/or prebuilt docker images to pull in those.

Any tests we can move the source code repository are beneficial. This would mean you can run them on every check in getting a shorter feedback loop back to the developers.

 

These are some thoughts I need to understand the requirements we have for running the test suites to try to get a better architecture for the CI infrastructure here.

 

Lisa

 

From: <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> on behalf of "Ranganathan, Ramya" <ramya.ranganathan@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 11:22 AM
To: "Goodell, Leonard" <leonard.goodell@...>, Jim White <jim@...>, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: "edgex-tsc-qa-test@..." <edgex-tsc-qa-test@...>, "Ranganathan, Ramya" <ramya.ranganathan@...>
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Lenny/Jim,

 

Testcase apps is just a collection of modular functions that exercises a test condition and checks for the test result.

I agree with your reasoning that lower level functions can be put directly under test case app.

The reason we have “keyword folder” is just because it is a robot terminology and the logical place for the robot keywords is the testcase app folder.

If there are functions written in python, it will be put directly under testcase app. I will let the TAF evolve on this.

 

Test Scenarios are broader use case scenarios that makes calls to the test case apps and promotes higher level decision making and extends the capability to run these test case apps under different scenarios. I agree with Lenny’s comments below :

>>    I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

For Jim’s comment , I see Test scenarios -> Integration testing and performance testing will evolve and include more than the single service testing to cover cross service E2E test scenarios. I will let TAF evolve on this as well.

 

Thanks,

Ramya

 

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Goodell, Leonard
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 9:37 AM
To: Jim White <jim@...>; Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Cloud,

   Building on Jim’s questions..

Aren’t testCaseApp just a type of testScencarios? i.e. api_testing.

Also, why do we need the keywords level folder? Can the lower folders be moved up to testCaseApp?

 

Jim,

   I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

-Lenny

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 8:05 AM
To: Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Cloud, thanks for putting up this strawman. 

 

Is the testCaseApp folder, with service subfolders, essentially service API tests?  If that is the case, might the functional testing the API tests?

 

Do testScencarios refer to testCaseApps or vice versa or are they totally unrelated?  What's the dotted line around testScenarios?

 

Integration tests has no subfolder, but I can envision particular integration tests already (core to appl service, device service to core, etc.).  Do we need to think about service to service integration and whole system integration (from device service through application service for example) and how we organize these

 

On performance testing, I think we would want service level tests, but there are other key performance measures that are even more important in the long run.  Examples: time for single sensor reading from south to north, max data throughput of core data, etc.  Do we need to consider performance testing beyond simple metrics and how we organize those tests?

 

 

Jim White

CTO, IOTech

EdgeX Foundry co-founder & TSC Vice-chairman

On EdgeX Slack @ jpwhite

612-916-6693

 

 

On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 07:54, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...> wrote:

Hi all,

 

As the discussion, we will make all kinds of the new tests in edgex-taf repository, including functional test, integration test, performance test, and so on.

The attachment is the proposal of new file structure.  Please help take a look and let us know your thoughts.

Thanks.

 

--

Best Regards,

Cloud Tsai



--
Best Regards,
Cloud Tsai


EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 01/14/2020 #cal-notice

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When:
Tuesday, 14 January 2020 11:00pm to
Wednesday, 15 January 2020 12:00am
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

Organizer:
EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description:
EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


Upcoming Event: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 01/14/2020 11:00pm to Wed, 01/15/2020 12:00am, Please RSVP #cal-reminder

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...>
 

Reminder: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When: Tuesday, 14 January 2020, 11:00pm to Wednesday, 15 January 2020, 12:00am (GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:https://zoom.us/j/635232828

An RSVP is requested. Click here to RSVP

Organizer: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


Re: edgex-taf file structure for review

Rashidi-ranjbar, Lisa A
 

Hi All,

 

I’m seeing a pretty big issue with the setup of this repository with regards to the CI infrastructure.

With the changes DevOps has made in Geneva it is important to note that any Jenkinsfile put in the root of the repository will automatically create a Jenkins job associated with it.

These changes are still underway but you can see the progress looking at the EdgeXFoundry organization in Jenkins:

https://jenkins.edgexfoundry.org/view/EdgeX%20Foundry%20Project/job/edgexfoundry/

 

In this diagram we have only one Jenkinsfile. This means that there will be one job running all these test suites associated with the following:

  • Functional Testing
  • Integration Testing
  • Performance Testing

 

From my perspective I think we will need more of a fine tuning available for running these tests. I don’t think having one Jenkins job and one Jenkinsfile will be sufficient.

Even today we only have more than one Jenkins job to run the suite in blackbox tests. The fact that we run ALL of the blackbox test suite at once has been a major pain point for using blackbox testing.

If we lump all of these tests together for TAF we will be creating an even larger overall suite of tests than the existing blackbox testing. Which in time we will mean people will be waiting even longer to get the test suite that they care about completed.

 

Instead of lumping things together we need to think about how we can split things up. Using the plugins we have set up for Geneva we can split things up using two different ways:

 

For common elements, we can look at using things like git submodules and/or prebuilt docker images to pull in those.

Any tests we can move the source code repository are beneficial. This would mean you can run them on every check in getting a shorter feedback loop back to the developers.

 

These are some thoughts I need to understand the requirements we have for running the test suites to try to get a better architecture for the CI infrastructure here.

 

Lisa

 

From: <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> on behalf of "Ranganathan, Ramya" <ramya.ranganathan@...>
Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 11:22 AM
To: "Goodell, Leonard" <leonard.goodell@...>, Jim White <jim@...>, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: "edgex-tsc-qa-test@..." <edgex-tsc-qa-test@...>, "Ranganathan, Ramya" <ramya.ranganathan@...>
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Lenny/Jim,

 

Testcase apps is just a collection of modular functions that exercises a test condition and checks for the test result.

I agree with your reasoning that lower level functions can be put directly under test case app.

The reason we have “keyword folder” is just because it is a robot terminology and the logical place for the robot keywords is the testcase app folder.

If there are functions written in python, it will be put directly under testcase app. I will let the TAF evolve on this.

 

Test Scenarios are broader use case scenarios that makes calls to the test case apps and promotes higher level decision making and extends the capability to run these test case apps under different scenarios. I agree with Lenny’s comments below :

>>    I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

For Jim’s comment , I see Test scenarios -> Integration testing and performance testing will evolve and include more than the single service testing to cover cross service E2E test scenarios. I will let TAF evolve on this as well.

 

Thanks,

Ramya

 

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Goodell, Leonard
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 9:37 AM
To: Jim White <jim@...>; Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Cloud,

   Building on Jim’s questions..

Aren’t testCaseApp just a type of testScencarios? i.e. api_testing.

Also, why do we need the keywords level folder? Can the lower folders be moved up to testCaseApp?

 

Jim,

   I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

-Lenny

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 8:05 AM
To: Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Cloud, thanks for putting up this strawman. 

 

Is the testCaseApp folder, with service subfolders, essentially service API tests?  If that is the case, might the functional testing the API tests?

 

Do testScencarios refer to testCaseApps or vice versa or are they totally unrelated?  What's the dotted line around testScenarios?

 

Integration tests has no subfolder, but I can envision particular integration tests already (core to appl service, device service to core, etc.).  Do we need to think about service to service integration and whole system integration (from device service through application service for example) and how we organize these

 

On performance testing, I think we would want service level tests, but there are other key performance measures that are even more important in the long run.  Examples: time for single sensor reading from south to north, max data throughput of core data, etc.  Do we need to consider performance testing beyond simple metrics and how we organize those tests?

 

 

Jim White

CTO, IOTech

EdgeX Foundry co-founder & TSC Vice-chairman

On EdgeX Slack @ jpwhite

612-916-6693

 

 

On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 07:54, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...> wrote:

Hi all,

 

As the discussion, we will make all kinds of the new tests in edgex-taf repository, including functional test, integration test, performance test, and so on.

The attachment is the proposal of new file structure.  Please help take a look and let us know your thoughts.

Thanks.

 

--

Best Regards,

Cloud Tsai


Re: edgex-taf file structure for review

Ranganathan, Ramya
 

Hi Lenny/Jim,

 

Testcase apps is just a collection of modular functions that exercises a test condition and checks for the test result.

I agree with your reasoning that lower level functions can be put directly under test case app.

The reason we have “keyword folder” is just because it is a robot terminology and the logical place for the robot keywords is the testcase app folder.

If there are functions written in python, it will be put directly under testcase app. I will let the TAF evolve on this.

 

Test Scenarios are broader use case scenarios that makes calls to the test case apps and promotes higher level decision making and extends the capability to run these test case apps under different scenarios. I agree with Lenny’s comments below :

>>    I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

For Jim’s comment , I see Test scenarios -> Integration testing and performance testing will evolve and include more than the single service testing to cover cross service E2E test scenarios. I will let TAF evolve on this as well.

 

Thanks,

Ramya

 

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Goodell, Leonard
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 9:37 AM
To: Jim White <jim@...>; Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Hi Cloud,

   Building on Jim’s questions..

Aren’t testCaseApp just a type of testScencarios? i.e. api_testing.

Also, why do we need the keywords level folder? Can the lower folders be moved up to testCaseApp?

 

Jim,

   I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

-Lenny

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 8:05 AM
To: Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Cloud, thanks for putting up this strawman. 

 

Is the testCaseApp folder, with service subfolders, essentially service API tests?  If that is the case, might the functional testing the API tests?

 

Do testScencarios refer to testCaseApps or vice versa or are they totally unrelated?  What's the dotted line around testScenarios?

 

Integration tests has no subfolder, but I can envision particular integration tests already (core to appl service, device service to core, etc.).  Do we need to think about service to service integration and whole system integration (from device service through application service for example) and how we organize these

 

On performance testing, I think we would want service level tests, but there are other key performance measures that are even more important in the long run.  Examples: time for single sensor reading from south to north, max data throughput of core data, etc.  Do we need to consider performance testing beyond simple metrics and how we organize those tests?

 

 

Jim White

CTO, IOTech

EdgeX Foundry co-founder & TSC Vice-chairman

On EdgeX Slack @ jpwhite

612-916-6693

 

 

On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 07:54, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...> wrote:

Hi all,

 

As the discussion, we will make all kinds of the new tests in edgex-taf repository, including functional test, integration test, performance test, and so on.

The attachment is the proposal of new file structure.  Please help take a look and let us know your thoughts.

Thanks.

 

--

Best Regards,

Cloud Tsai


Re: edgex-taf file structure for review

Goodell, Leonard
 

Hi Cloud,

   Building on Jim’s questions..

Aren’t testCaseApp just a type of testScencarios? i.e. api_testing.

Also, why do we need the keywords level folder? Can the lower folders be moved up to testCaseApp?

 

Jim,

   I see integration tests as Use Cases that exercise some feature system wide. We may have sub-folders or files with the name of the Use Case. One Use Case could be “Device to Cloud”, another could be “Data driven Commanding”, etc.

 

-Lenny

 

From: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@... <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...> On Behalf Of Jim White
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 8:05 AM
To: Cloud Tsai <cloud@...>
Cc: edgex-tsc-qa-test@...
Subject: Re: [Edgex-tsc-QA-Test] edgex-taf file structure for review

 

Cloud, thanks for putting up this strawman. 

 

Is the testCaseApp folder, with service subfolders, essentially service API tests?  If that is the case, might the functional testing the API tests?

 

Do testScencarios refer to testCaseApps or vice versa or are they totally unrelated?  What's the dotted line around testScenarios?

 

Integration tests has no subfolder, but I can envision particular integration tests already (core to appl service, device service to core, etc.).  Do we need to think about service to service integration and whole system integration (from device service through application service for example) and how we organize these

 

On performance testing, I think we would want service level tests, but there are other key performance measures that are even more important in the long run.  Examples: time for single sensor reading from south to north, max data throughput of core data, etc.  Do we need to consider performance testing beyond simple metrics and how we organize those tests?

 

 

Jim White

CTO, IOTech

EdgeX Foundry co-founder & TSC Vice-chairman

On EdgeX Slack @ jpwhite

612-916-6693

 

 

On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 07:54, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...> wrote:

Hi all,

 

As the discussion, we will make all kinds of the new tests in edgex-taf repository, including functional test, integration test, performance test, and so on.

The attachment is the proposal of new file structure.  Please help take a look and let us know your thoughts.

Thanks.

 

--

Best Regards,

Cloud Tsai


Re: edgex-taf file structure for review

Jim White
 

Cloud, thanks for putting up this strawman. 

Is the testCaseApp folder, with service subfolders, essentially service API tests?  If that is the case, might the functional testing the API tests?

Do testScencarios refer to testCaseApps or vice versa or are they totally unrelated?  What's the dotted line around testScenarios?

Integration tests has no subfolder, but I can envision particular integration tests already (core to appl service, device service to core, etc.).  Do we need to think about service to service integration and whole system integration (from device service through application service for example) and how we organize these

On performance testing, I think we would want service level tests, but there are other key performance measures that are even more important in the long run.  Examples: time for single sensor reading from south to north, max data throughput of core data, etc.  Do we need to consider performance testing beyond simple metrics and how we organize those tests?


Jim White
CTO, IOTech
EdgeX Foundry co-founder & TSC Vice-chairman
On EdgeX Slack @ jpwhite
612-916-6693


On Tue, 14 Jan 2020 at 07:54, Cloud Tsai <cloud@...> wrote:
Hi all,

As the discussion, we will make all kinds of the new tests in edgex-taf repository, including functional test, integration test, performance test, and so on.
The attachment is the proposal of new file structure.  Please help take a look and let us know your thoughts.
Thanks.

--
Best Regards,
Cloud Tsai


edgex-taf file structure for review

Cloud Tsai
 

Hi all,

As the discussion, we will make all kinds of the new tests in edgex-taf repository, including functional test, integration test, performance test, and so on.
The attachment is the proposal of new file structure.  Please help take a look and let us know your thoughts.
Thanks.

--
Best Regards,
Cloud Tsai


EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 01/07/2020 #cal-notice

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When:
Tuesday, 7 January 2020 11:00pm to
Wednesday, 8 January 2020 12:00am
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

Organizer:
EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description:
EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


Upcoming Event: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 01/07/2020 11:00pm to Wed, 01/08/2020 12:00am, Please RSVP #cal-reminder

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...>
 

Reminder: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When: Tuesday, 7 January 2020, 11:00pm to Wednesday, 8 January 2020, 12:00am (GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:https://zoom.us/j/635232828

An RSVP is requested. Click here to RSVP

Organizer: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 12/31/2019 #cal-notice

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When:
Tuesday, 31 December 2019 11:00pm to
Wednesday, 1 January 2020 12:00am
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

Organizer:
EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description:
EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


Upcoming Event: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 12/31/2019 11:00pm to Wed, 01/01/2020 12:00am, Please RSVP #cal-reminder

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...>
 

Reminder: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When: Tuesday, 31 December 2019, 11:00pm to Wednesday, 1 January 2020, 12:00am (GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:https://zoom.us/j/635232828

An RSVP is requested. Click here to RSVP

Organizer: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 12/24/2019 #cal-notice

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When:
Tuesday, 24 December 2019 11:00pm to
Wednesday, 25 December 2019 12:00am
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

Organizer:
EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description:
EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


Upcoming Event: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 12/24/2019 11:00pm to Wed, 12/25/2019 12:00am, Please RSVP #cal-reminder

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...>
 

Reminder: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When: Tuesday, 24 December 2019, 11:00pm to Wednesday, 25 December 2019, 12:00am (GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:https://zoom.us/j/635232828

An RSVP is requested. Click here to RSVP

Organizer: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 12/17/2019 #cal-notice

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When:
Tuesday, 17 December 2019 11:00pm to
Wednesday, 18 December 2019 12:00am
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

Organizer:
EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description:
EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


Upcoming Event: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 12/17/2019 11:00pm to Wed, 12/18/2019 12:00am, Please RSVP #cal-reminder

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...>
 

Reminder: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When: Tuesday, 17 December 2019, 11:00pm to Wednesday, 18 December 2019, 12:00am (GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:https://zoom.us/j/635232828

An RSVP is requested. Click here to RSVP

Organizer: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 12/10/2019 #cal-notice

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <noreply@...>
 

EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When:
Tuesday, 10 December 2019 11:00pm to
Wednesday, 11 December 2019 12:00am
(GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

Organizer:
EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description:
EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW


Upcoming Event: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing - Tue, 12/10/2019 11:00pm to Wed, 12/11/2019 12:00am, Please RSVP #cal-reminder

EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@lists.edgexfoundry.org Calendar <EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...>
 

Reminder: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing

When: Tuesday, 10 December 2019, 11:00pm to Wednesday, 11 December 2019, 12:00am (GMT+00:00) Europe/London

Where:https://zoom.us/j/635232828

An RSVP is requested. Click here to RSVP

Organizer: EdgeX-TSC-QA-Test@...

Description: EdgeX QA/Test WG: Validation/Testing meeting. Meeting content posted to QA/Test Wiki.
Meeting Lead: Robin Chatterjee, EdgeX QA/Test WG Chair, robin@...
-----Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/635232828

One tap mobile
+16699006833,,635232828# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,635232828# US (New York)

Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
        +1 855 880 1246 US Toll-free
        +1 877 369 0926 US Toll-free
Meeting ID: 635 232 828
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abzs1KyOkW